In 2015, Europe faced a major migration wave as people fled wars, poverty, and persecution, primarily from Syria, the Middle East, Asia, and Africa. This posed significant governance challenges, particularly for Finland, which received around 30,000 asylum applications—ten times its usual intake. While much attention has been given to the broader migration crisis, this study focuses on Finland’s response within the EU, using a constructivist approach. Migration governance involves collaboration between multiple actors and institutions across different levels. This research explores how Finland manages immigration at both local and national levels and interacts with EU institutions. It analyses these processes using social constructivism and the multilevel governance (MLG) framework. Interviews with key migration governance actors reveal that Finland’s culture of trust and cooperation and its small size contribute to effective migration governance. Finland’s well-prepared positions, shaped by government programs and parliamentary debates, allow it to engage effectively in EU negotiations. This unified approach reflects the constructivist view of multilevel governance, ensuring Finland plays an active role in EU deliberations.
References
[1]
Arnold, E., Kolarz, P., Pickles, A., & Romanainen J. (2015). The Place of Research-Based Evidence in Policymaking. Technopolis Group.
[2]
Bavinck, M., Chuenpagdee, R., Jentoft, S., & Kooiman, J. (2013). Governability of Fisheries and Aquaculture: Theory and Applications (Vol. 7). Springer.
[3]
Bricki, N., & Green, J. (2007). A Guide to Using Qualitative Research Methodology. https://fieldresearch.msf.org/handle/10144/84230
[4]
Bruce, P., & Shelley, R. (2010). Assessing Stakeholder Engagement. Communication Journal of New Zealand, 11, 30-48.
[5]
Carmel, E. (2014). With What Implications? An Assessment of EU Migration Governance between Union Regulation and National Diversity. Migration Letters, 11, 137-153. https://doi.org/10.33182/ml.v11i2.236
[6]
Collett, E., & Le Coz, C. (2018). After the Storm. Learning from the EU Response to the Migration Crisis. Migration Policy Institute Europe.
[7]
Coman, R., Crespy, A., & Schmidt, V. (2020). Governance and Politics in the Post-Crisis European Union. Cambridge University Press.
[8]
Dimitriadis, I., Hajer, M. H. J., Fontanari, E., & Ambrosini, M. (2021). Local “Battlegrounds”. Relocating Multi-Level and Multi-Actor Governance of Immigration. Revue européenne des migrations internationales, 37, 251-275. https://doi.org/10.4000/remi.18552
[9]
Dines, N., Montagna, N., & Vacchelli, E. (2018). Beyond Crisis Talk: Interrogating Migration and Crises in Europe. Sociology, 52, 439-447. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038518767372
[10]
EASO Asylum Report (2020). Annual Report on the Situation of Asylum in the European Union.
[11]
EMN (2017). The Changing Influx of Asylum Seekers in 2014-2016: Member State Responses. National Report of Finland.
[12]
EMN (2018). Changing Influx of Asylum Seekers 2014-2016. Synthesis Report for the EMN Study. European Migration Network.
[13]
Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of Convenience Sampling and Purposive Sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5, 1-4. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11
[14]
Euronews (2020). Hungary, Poland and Czech Republic‘oppose EU’s New Migration Pact’. Hungary, Poland and Czech Republic’ Oppose EU’s New Migration Pact. Euronews.
[15]
European Commission (2015). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. A European Agenda on Migration.
[16]
European Commission (2020). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Com-mittee of the Regions. Brussels 23.9.2020. COM (2020) 609 Final.
[17]
European Council (2015). 3411th Meeting of the Council of the European Union (Justice and Home Affairs), Held in Brussels on 22 September 2015.
[18]
Faberi, F. (2018). Multilevel Governance: Linking Up Local, Regional and National Levels to Deliver Integrated Sustainable Energy Action Plans and Projects.Odyssee-Mure. Policy Brief.
[19]
Geddes, A., & Scholten, P. (2016). The Politics of Migration and Immigration in Europe. SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473982703
[20]
Goodman, M. S., & Sanders Thompson, V. L. (2017). The Science of Stakeholder Engagement in Research: Classification, Implementation, and Evaluation. Translational Behavioral Medicine, 7, 486-491. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13142-017-0495-z
[21]
Immigration Department (2018). International Migration 2017-2018—Report for Finland. Migration/Ministry of the Interior Publication 25/2018.
[22]
King, R. & Lulle, A. (2016). Research on Migration Facing Realities and Maximising Opportunities: A Policy Review. A Policy Review. Loughborough University. Report. https://hdl.handle.net/2134/13079600.v1
[23]
Mainwaring, C. (2012). Centring on the Margins: Migration Control in Malta, Cyprus and the European Union. Master’s Thesis, University of Oxford.
[24]
Nugent, N. (2017). The Government and Politics of the European Union. Red Globe Press.
[25]
Official Statistics of Finland (OSF) (2021) Preliminary Population Statistics. Statistics Finland. http://www.stat.fi/til/vamuu/2021/11/vamuu_2021_11_2021-12-21_tie_001_en.html
[26]
Pierre, J., & Peters, B. G. (2002). Governance, Politics and the State. Palgrave Macmillan.
[27]
Pyrhönen, N., & Wahlbeck, Ö. (2018). The Finnish National Report on the Politicization of the “Refugee Crisis” in Public Debate. http://ceaseval.eu/publications
[28]
Rainio-Niemi, J. (2015). A Nordic Paradox of Openness and Consensus? The Case of Finland. In N. Götz, & C. Marklund (Eds.), The Paradox of Openness (pp. 27-49). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004281196_004
[29]
Setia, M. (2017). Qualitative Health Research: Methodology Series Module 10: Qualitative Health Research. Indian Journal of Dermatology, 62, 367-370. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijd.ijd_290_17
[30]
Terrón, A., & Pinyol, G. (2018). Migration and Asylum in EU Regions: Towards a Multi-level Governance Approach. Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions (CPMR 2018). https://cpmr.org/
[31]
Timo, S. (2015). Maahanmuuton Päätösvaltaa Ei Pidä Antaa Komissiolle. http://timosoini.fi/2015/06/maahanmuuton-paatosvaltaa-ei-pida-antaa-komissiolle/
[32]
Torfing, J., Peters, B. G., Pierre, J., & Sørensen, E. (2012). Interactive GovernanceAdvancing the Paradigm. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199596751.001.0001
[33]
van Middelaar, L. (2020). The Return of Politics—The European Union after the Crises in the Eurozone and Ukraine. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 54, 495-507. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12336
[34]
Vanto, J., Saarikkomäki, E., Alvesalo-Kuusi, A., Lepinkäinen, N., Pirjatanniemi, E., & Lavapuro, J. (2021). Collectivized Discretion: Seeking Explanations for Decreased Asylum Recognition Rates in Finland after Europe’s 2015 “Refugee Crisis”. International Migration Review, 56, 754-779. https://doi.org/10.1177/01979183211044096
[35]
Vaughan-Williams, N. (2015). Europe’s Border Crisis: Biopolitical Security and Beyond. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198747024.001.0001
[36]
Wahlbeck, Ö. (2019). To Share or Not to Share Responsibility? Finnish Refugee Policy and the Hesitant Support for a Common European Asylum System. Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies, 17, 299-316. https://doi.org/10.1080/15562948.2018.1468048
[37]
Wolff, S. (2020). Managing the Refugee Crisis: A Divided and Restrictive Europe? In R. Coman, A. Crespy, & V. Schmidt (Eds.), Governance and Politics in the Post-Crisis European Union (p. 238). Cambridge University Press.
